Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |
JustSharkbait
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
6
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 22:24:00 -
[121] - Quote
CCP just wants to make as much money as they can off of all the IP contained in their game. For example, if at some point CCP wanted to be able to sell alliance merchandise themselves then they would need the legal right too.
Since it is used so much, let us use Goonswarm. If CCP eventually wants to sell GSF logo shirts as another way to make money they would need rights to do. They would also need the ability to tell GSF to stop providing items for sell using the name/logo. Then, CCP could open an "alliance merchandise shop" and sell custom stuff with alliance logos while preventing anyone else from doing so.
GREAT WORK CCP. While it is nice that we are allowed to create in-game logo's and names, CCP most certainly does NOT own my character name or any group names i create and I use them in other games and media and own registered domains with them as well.
Now, for marketing purposes they can use what they want to promote their game, as long as it comes from within the game, but if they were to ever make a show or comic, etc, they would still have to get the permission of those involved to feature them/their group in a show/movie.
For example, I don't think they can make a movie called "GOONS VS NCDOT" without getting both parties permission to feature them in a medium that is not within the game itself. So even if their cute little EULA meant something in the long rung, they still would have issues from other areas, not just a logo. However, if they made an EVE promotional video and featured real groups, then they would be able to do that.
If all games tried to be this picky about IP stuff then there would be no branding and we would have to use different names in ever game we play. That is BS and not conducive to a good gaming experience.
Regardless of whether my examples work, this just seems like CCP is saying "we have more money then you, so if you disagree COME AT ME BRO". that is just sad. CCP are griefers. LOL. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6434
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 22:31:00 -
[122] - Quote
Darius JOHNSON wrote: You can't arbitrarily decide I've granted you a license merely by virtue of data passing through your server though is what I'm getting at. That was written before I saw the license grant.
Basically what they're saying is that if Paul Mcartney sends his buddy in eve a copy of an MP3 file of the most famous Beetles song he still owns CCP has a license to use that forever however they like or it becomes theirs since he owns it. That's how flat out stupid this paragraph is.
the issue they're trying to avoid is anyone making IP claims because they released a video of gameplay with "goonswarm" in the name or something like that, or a screenshot of a tcu with rotating fatbee
for the user-generated content part, same thing, really, it's trying to avoid even the hint of a lawsuit. all of these clauses are probably standard eula boilerplate added by lawyers who are thinking nobody ever got fired or sued for malpractice by having the eula too broad
but there's simply no good reason for trying to grab the actual ownership right instead of the licencing right that's everything ownership has except the ability to prevent the owner from doing things Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Disadvantaged Persons Outreach Division:
"We hire one-half of the working class to kill the other half." |
Darius JOHNSON
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
347
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 22:35:00 -
[123] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Darius JOHNSON wrote: You can't arbitrarily decide I've granted you a license merely by virtue of data passing through your server though is what I'm getting at. That was written before I saw the license grant.
Basically what they're saying is that if Paul Mcartney sends his buddy in eve a copy of an MP3 file of the most famous Beetles song he still owns CCP has a license to use that forever however they like or it becomes theirs since he owns it. That's how flat out stupid this paragraph is.
the issue they're trying to avoid is anyone making IP claims because they released a video of gameplay with "goonswarm" in the name or something like that, or a screenshot of a tcu with rotating fatbee for the user-generated content part, same thing, really, it's trying to avoid even the hint of a lawsuit. all of these clauses are probably standard eula boilerplate added by lawyers who are thinking nobody ever got fired or sued for malpractice by having the eula too broad but there's simply no good reason for trying to grab the actual ownership right instead of the licencing right that's everything ownership has except the ability to prevent the owner from doing things and the fun thing about an eula (to the extent it's legally enforcable) is it's no more arbitrary than a signed contract :v: contracts of adhesion are fun!
Oh I know completely what the intent here should be but that intent starts to look pretty damn different when ownership of something that you don't own is asserted and in this case that ownership assertion is CLARIFIED. I don't think anyone would have a problem with, as I think we've both said, allowing CCP a license to use such things for marketing materials (as they have) among other things. However when they're doing so or issuing C&D's on the basis of ownership they themselves are committing the bad act and then you have to start wondering why they feel they need to own something that they don't actually own or need to in order to continue doing business. |
Darius JOHNSON
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
349
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 22:37:00 -
[124] - Quote
Anything that runs on my PC from now on is my property including all artwork, code, music or text of any kind and solely my property. Grats, the next time EVE launches I own it. |
Huttan Funaila
Terminal Radioactivity
371
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 22:38:00 -
[125] - Quote
7-11 uses the fatbee on coffee syrup. Or the clipart that fatbee is based on. Or they're run by goonswarm. Grrr goons. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6436
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 22:40:00 -
[126] - Quote
to be honest the EULA clauses don't bother me. the attempt to grab ownership simply fails and the rest of the stuff is reasonable for ccp's protection from IP litigation
the licencing agreement though, nobody should ever sign that, that's a hilariously viciously stacked contract that goes out of its way to **** you as hard as it can and really tries to scrape of every possible legal right you could have to use your own alliance's logo instead of just protecting CCP from malicious IP claims Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Disadvantaged Persons Outreach Division:
"We hire one-half of the working class to kill the other half." |
JustSharkbait
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
6
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 22:47:00 -
[127] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:to be honest the EULA clauses don't bother me. the attempt to grab ownership simply fails and the rest of the stuff is reasonable for ccp's protection from IP litigation
the licencing agreement though, nobody should ever sign that, that's a hilariously viciously stacked contract that goes out of its way to **** you as hard as it can and really tries to scrape of every possible legal right you could have to use your own alliance's logo instead of just protecting CCP from malicious IP claims
agree. I can understand they need some protections, but the rest is LOL.
don't sign anything. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA
488
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 22:47:00 -
[128] - Quote
Huttan Funaila wrote:7-11 uses the fatbee on coffee syrup. Or the clipart that fatbee is based on. Or they're run by goonswarm. Grrr goons.
http://www.fatbeeswag.com/index.php/
Quick CCP! SUE!!!
/popcorn
Their "about" page is funny.
Quote:About FatbeeSwag.com
I wish to see the world overtaken by swag from EVE Online alliances.
This store is my way of hatching this nefarious plan |
Logix42
Taxation Damnation
182
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 23:07:00 -
[129] - Quote
Is there an international copyright law? or does CCP have to abide by Icelandic copyright law? or by the users' home country's copyright law?
Also, what about Legal stuff in general that we have to abide by for EVE? what country's laws are we following? Go beyond the edge of space... Explore |
Khanh'rhh
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2675
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 23:11:00 -
[130] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:i am starting to discover a love for my new favorite ccpism, the Clarification(TM)
Personally I'm awaiting the re-clarification of the re-wording of the re-clarification before I pass too much comment. Those have been the best recently. "Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual, issued in the 1930 |
|
Zappity
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
823
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 23:26:00 -
[131] - Quote
Bagehi wrote:Zappity wrote:Right, so what about third party rights as per my first post? The response has so far been 'they don't need rights because we own it anyway' which is not useful. Zappity wrote:Third party rights for a company printing T-shirts? Licence is non-transferrable and can't sublicence so we would have to print ourselves. Based on the way the license is written currently, I think you were correct to say that you would have to print shirts at home to comply with it. It says: Quote:1.3. Except as set forth in this Agreement, no express or implied license or right of any kind is granted to Licensee regarding the Licensed Property or CCP Marks, including any right to know, use, produce, receive, reproduce, copy, market, sell, distribute, transfer, modify, adapt, disassemble, decompile, or reverse engineer the Licensed Property or create derivative works based on the Licensed Property or any portions thereof. Which states explicitly you do not have the right to transfer your right to reproduce your alliance logo "to defray costs and expenses incurred by or on behalf of your Alliance" to a printing company. I am not an attorney though. I only needed a dozen credits in contract law for my degree, so take my opinion on the topic for what it is worth. Exactly this. All of the arm waving about ownership is irrelevant. A printing company has no stake and will not take a position against CCP just because the players disagree with CCP's ownership statement which is backed up by YOU agreeing to their clause when you accept the licence or EULA.
CCP needs to add third party sublicence. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6443
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 23:27:00 -
[132] - Quote
Logix42 wrote:Is there an international copyright law? or does CCP have to abide by Icelandic copyright law? or by the users' home country's copyright law?
Also, what about Legal stuff in general that we have to abide by for EVE? what country's laws are we following? i'm actually a little fuzzy on this point but I don't believe a copyright I hold under US law can be transferred in violation of US law by icelandic contracts even if those can transfer an icelandic copyright and I believe icelandic law doesn't purport to govern foreign copyrights
so i'm pretty sure that they're governed by the law of the country it was created in Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Disadvantaged Persons Outreach Division:
"We hire one-half of the working class to kill the other half." |
Darius JOHNSON
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
352
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 23:29:00 -
[133] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Bagehi wrote:Zappity wrote:Right, so what about third party rights as per my first post? The response has so far been 'they don't need rights because we own it anyway' which is not useful. Zappity wrote:Third party rights for a company printing T-shirts? Licence is non-transferrable and can't sublicence so we would have to print ourselves. Based on the way the license is written currently, I think you were correct to say that you would have to print shirts at home to comply with it. It says: Quote:1.3. Except as set forth in this Agreement, no express or implied license or right of any kind is granted to Licensee regarding the Licensed Property or CCP Marks, including any right to know, use, produce, receive, reproduce, copy, market, sell, distribute, transfer, modify, adapt, disassemble, decompile, or reverse engineer the Licensed Property or create derivative works based on the Licensed Property or any portions thereof. Which states explicitly you do not have the right to transfer your right to reproduce your alliance logo "to defray costs and expenses incurred by or on behalf of your Alliance" to a printing company. I am not an attorney though. I only needed a dozen credits in contract law for my degree, so take my opinion on the topic for what it is worth. Exactly this. All of the arm waving about ownership is irrelevant. A printing company has no stake and will not take a position against CCP just because the players disagree with CCP's ownership statement which is backed up by YOU agreeing to their clause when you accept the licence or EULA. CCP needs to add third party sublicence.
CCP has no ownership stake. Posts on forums aren't valid transfers of ownership. Registration with copyright offices is defining ownership. CCP is not a position to sublicense anything. |
Zappity
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
823
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 23:40:00 -
[134] - Quote
Darius JOHNSON wrote:CCP has no ownership stake. Posts on forums aren't valid transfers of ownership. Registration with copyright offices is defining ownership. CCP is not a position to sublicense anything. This is clearly not true. You agreed to the contract when you uploaded the graphic or accepted the EULA. Of course ownership and licences can be transferred by contract. We do it all the time. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec. |
Klyith
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
55
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 23:49:00 -
[135] - Quote
Zappity wrote: This is clearly not true. You agreed to the contract when you uploaded the graphic or accepted the EULA. Of course ownership and licences can be transferred by contract. We do it all the time.
a) A eula or "by doing ___ you agree to" is specifically not a valid transfer of copyright ownership in US law. It must be a signed document. (Signed document in the US can mean a lot of things that aren't paper with ink on it these days, but this ain't it.)
b) Fatbee is old enough that the terms and conditions were probably not the same when we did it. Who knows, Mittani I'm sure is digging through his old email this evening. But CCP can't change the conditions unilaterally, that's why they're going to contact all alliance execs to get a yes in (digital) writing.
|
Darius JOHNSON
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
353
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 23:51:00 -
[136] - Quote
Klyith wrote:Zappity wrote: This is clearly not true. You agreed to the contract when you uploaded the graphic or accepted the EULA. Of course ownership and licences can be transferred by contract. We do it all the time.
a) A eula or "by doing ___ you agree to" is specifically not a valid transfer of copyright ownership in US law. It must be a signed document. (Signed document in the US can mean a lot of things that aren't paper with ink on it these days, but this ain't it.) b) Fatbee is old enough that the terms and conditions were probably not the same when we did it. Who knows, Mittani I'm sure is digging through his old email this evening. But CCP can't change the conditions unilaterally, that's why they're going to contact all alliance execs to get a yes in (digital) writing.
I've also already stated why thinking you could claim ownership of anything transferred over your servers is flat out dumb and legally unenforceable. CCP may as well use that paragraph for toilet paper if the intent is to gain ownership over IP, which nobody thought it was until someone wrote a dev blog today. |
Uma D
Uma D Ltd.
42
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 23:54:00 -
[137] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Darius JOHNSON wrote:CCP has no ownership stake. Posts on forums aren't valid transfers of ownership. Registration with copyright offices is defining ownership. CCP is not a position to sublicense anything. This is clearly not true. You agreed to the contract when you uploaded the graphic or accepted the EULA. Of course ownership and licences can be transferred by contract. We do it all the time.
-º 29 Rechtsgesch+ñfte ++ber das Urheberrecht
(1) Das Urheberrecht ist nicht ++bertragbar, es sei denn, es wird in Erf++llung einer Verf++gung von Todes wegen oder an Miterben im Wege der Erbauseinandersetzung ++bertragen.
(2) Zul+ñssig sind die Einr+ñumung von Nutzungsrechten (-º 31), schuldrechtliche Einwilligungen und Vereinbarungen zu Verwertungsrechten sowie die in -º 39 geregelten Rechtsgesch+ñfte ++ber Urheberpers+¦nlichkeitsrechte.
Translates to:
-º 29 Transactions on copyright
(1) Copyright is not transferable, unless it is transferred in execution of a testamentary disposition or joint-heirs by way of inheritance disputes.
(2) are permitted the granting of rights (-º 31), debt legal consents and agreements on exploitation rights and the regulated in -º 39 legal transactions on moral rights.
Which means... even if i wanted to i can not transfer the ownership of my intellectual property. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6443
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 23:59:00 -
[138] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Darius JOHNSON wrote:CCP has no ownership stake. Posts on forums aren't valid transfers of ownership. Registration with copyright offices is defining ownership. CCP is not a position to sublicense anything. This is clearly not true. You agreed to the contract when you uploaded the graphic or accepted the EULA. Of course ownership and licences can be transferred by contract. We do it all the time. 17 usc 204(a), wrong
us law places specific restrictions on what constitutes a valid transfer of a us copyright, specifically to discourage situations like this Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Disadvantaged Persons Outreach Division:
"We hire one-half of the working class to kill the other half." |
Darius JOHNSON
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
353
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 00:09:00 -
[139] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Zappity wrote:Darius JOHNSON wrote:CCP has no ownership stake. Posts on forums aren't valid transfers of ownership. Registration with copyright offices is defining ownership. CCP is not a position to sublicense anything. This is clearly not true. You agreed to the contract when you uploaded the graphic or accepted the EULA. Of course ownership and licences can be transferred by contract. We do it all the time. 17 usc 204(a), wrong us law places specific restrictions on what constitutes a valid transfer of a us copyright, specifically to discourage situations like this
As I had said as an example there'd be no reason otherwise that your ISP couldn't put the exact same wording in their EULA and claim ownership over any data that passed through THEIR systems on the internet, eventually owning the entire internet. That's how stupid this wording is. |
Huttan Funaila
Terminal Radioactivity
372
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 00:21:00 -
[140] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Darius JOHNSON wrote:CCP has no ownership stake. Posts on forums aren't valid transfers of ownership. Registration with copyright offices is defining ownership. CCP is not a position to sublicense anything. This is clearly not true. You agreed to the contract when you uploaded the graphic or accepted the EULA. Of course ownership and licences can be transferred by contract. We do it all the time. This sort of issue comes up in open source software projects. I, like all salaried programmers in the US, have a contract with my employer that gives them all the rights to my inventions even done outside of work and on my own time with my own tools (if you're salaried and you don't think you have such a thing, then you weren't paying attention to what you signed when you got hired). Anything I upload belongs to my employer, and no amount of EULA can change that. People can huff and puff and rant all they want, but nothing that I upload is something that belongs to me, therefore no clickwrap, no EULA, no "I agree" can change that. That's why I can't help with EveMon and can't write other apps to give away - they aren't my property to give away. I'm a digital sharecropper, massah owns it, not me, not you, not CCP.
This is the state of copyright law in the US as it collides with employment law. And it is one legacy of section 1706 of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 - that it is very hard for professionals like engineers and programmers to be real contractors (this section removed the "safe harbor" provisions for these categories of workers). So while "contracting" is a big thing, and lots of programmers are called "contractors", they're really W2 employees of the contracting agency (very few set up their own LLC in order to be a real contractor).
Sample: http://www.perlmonks.org/?node=Professional%20Employees%20and%20Works%20for%20Hire
|
|
Batelle
Komm susser Tod
1738
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 00:58:00 -
[141] - Quote
Nice devblog, but its not very convincing. CCP is receiving a license to use the submitted IP, not the other way around. Calling it like it is would just be too much of a hassle for the legal office, which is a sad reality. "CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"
Never forget. |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
2465
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 01:01:00 -
[142] - Quote
Ortho Loess wrote:The reasons why that doesn't apply to the VOLT logo are in my original post here. The third point, at least, should apply to any alliance who's logo was submitted under the old system. The others will depend on circumstances. doubt a different background makes it a different design mate, you're no better off than using the same image
you're right not to accept the new licence though eh |
Batelle
Komm susser Tod
1738
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 01:11:00 -
[143] - Quote
Also, whats even more of a joke is the claim to own corporation and alliance names. There's no submission process or license agreement for that, and we all know there are thousands of such names that are unquestionably the IP/trademark or whatever of a third party completely unaffiliated with any Eve player or CCP. "CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"
Never forget. |
GizzyBoy
Aperture Harmonics No Holes Barred
83
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 01:24:00 -
[144] - Quote
Snap eve got serious... |
Findell Ronuken
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
12
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 01:27:00 -
[145] - Quote
This was a terrible clarification much like your last patch was a terrible patch. I hope you release 3 or 4 updates to it next week to make it sensible just like the patch. |
Drakonium
Sublime Tactic
8
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 01:34:00 -
[146] - Quote
I'm a little concerned by what I'm reading. I've created characters and corp names based on names that have personal meaning to me outside of Eve. I've used these names on other games and things outside from Eve. In fact, this year I started an LLC (a real company) which is named after one of my online characters. Of course, *my* names have no affiliation to CCP whatsoever and make no references about the game at all. The only link (if you want to call it that) is that they share the character/corp name.
My question is where do I stand on this? Am I violating CCP rules? |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
9014
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 01:46:00 -
[147] - Quote
The question is not "am I breaking CCP's rules", it's "is CCP breaking the law?" "Pretty much all 14 of the CSM were in favor of a drone assign nerf for OBVIOUS gameplay reasons" - Sala Cameron
|
MailDeadDrop
Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities
240
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 02:13:00 -
[148] - Quote
Darius JOHNSON wrote:Or we can just leave it in there instead of doing their work for them and tell them to eat a bag of dicks which is the only response anyone has earned here. That is unwise. If Goonswarm, Inc. ever intends to trademark the term (if they haven't already), then failing to defend CCP's encroachment at this time might be problematic.
MDD |
Arkady Romanov
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
81
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 05:23:00 -
[149] - Quote
Meanwhile I'm just busily laughing my ass off over the whole situation.
EVE is a game that encourages militant viciousness that extends out of the game. I wouldn't be surprised if there isn't more registered lawyers per head of population in EVE than any other MMO. Goonswarm alone has had 2 lawyers as CEOs. I'd like to say I'm surprised that CCP didn't see this coming, but I can't because myopia seems to be part of the corporate DNA.
I did know that the Fatbee logo was registered, but I didn't realise that Goonswarm was incorporated.
EVE is real alirght. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4621
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 05:32:00 -
[150] - Quote
This is literally the dumbest thing CCP has ever tried, so I'm not going to bother making a serious post. When you had the walls painted at CCP HQ, was the paint made from random forest mushrooms? This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal & proud member of the popular gay hookup site, somethingawful.com |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |